[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Artistic License 2.0

John Halton wrote:
> Out of interest, is there any reason why the developers of Parrot have
> adopted this licence rather than the GPL, given that the code (with
> trivial modifications) can be relicensed under the GPL anyway?

The usual variety of reasons. Partly historical. Partly for greater compatibility with the licenses of the languages we intend to run on Parrot (and packages written in those languages). Partly because of philosophical differences with a few (small) parts of GPLv3 that lead us to prefer a license that is compatible with all versions of the GPL and all "copyleft" licenses. Partly to allow proprietary versions under certain conditions.

From the discussion here, and references to an earlier thread, it sounds like there's general acceptance of the Artistic 2.0 as a free software license. We'll go ahead with the updated Parrot packages. Let us know if there are additional steps we should take before uploading packages under the new license.

I'll put in a wishlist request to base-files for the addition of "Artistic-2".


Reply to: